[David9694]

I posted an earlier version of this a while back – inspired to do update following THAT discussion about all things ULEZ. 

The “manifesto”, in terms of transport, only mentions stopping HS2, but there’s plenty on the usual right-wing obsessions: Brexit, immigration, veterans and climate change.  I had another look because I worry about the ongoing decline of the two main political parties. 

If the Cons stay wedded to Brexit, then we will go into the next GE with all the widespread impoverishment Brexit has ushered in – not helped by Covid, Putin, etc. People generally vote according to their pockets.  I don’t get Labour’s current position on Europe either, but let’s see how that evolves, and even the Cons may also evolve, or even pivot, but time is already running out for them.

Several roads now lead to the horrors of a further lurch to the right in this country.  Let’s hope Labour get the GE landslide the polls are predicting – but we’re still at least a year out from the real campaigning beginning. 

A cycling angle? With the Reform Party and its ilk, Facebook Steve and Nextdoor Dave attain real political influence. It’s not spelt out in the manifesto, but you can see where this is probably heading and what it is likely to mean for cycling.  You can bet that this lot are very much “on the side of hard working drivers” etc. 

As you all know, Dave’s going to “sort the traffic” and no doubt show them lazy planners how it’s done: Steve thinks the Council are corrupt, the police blinkered and is, if he can fit it in to his busy schedule he’s going to “teach them Lycra’s a thing or two.” It won’t concern him that his Mondeo is 3 months out of MoT or that Mrs Steve sometimes drives the kids in it uninsured. 

As vulnerable road users, vulnerable people, we rely a great deal on the rule of law for protection. The rule of law means that we understand what the laws are, they are in general fair, and how they are applied and to whom is even-handed and consistent. 

The fascist position is broadly the opposite – it’s all off-the-cuff to support today’s particular agenda – that’s why the Iain Duncan-Smith “happy to see ULEZ infra vandalised” comment is, as an example, so very worrying.  In the Conservatives, here is a party happy to send signals to enable the mob to attack RNLI stations, beat up immigrants, shout at teachers, doctors etc. 

This right-wing stuff works by allowing/enabling significant privileged groups to to think of themselves as the downtrodden underdog and here is a way to fight back.  The pro Brexit campaign played on people’s ignorance, fears and prejudices exactly as this does. 

It’s all about freedom, innit, less regulation, less tax burden, and damn the climate.  There’s more polar bears now, so it’s fine.  Let’s have open-cast coal mining, lithium mining and fracking. The section on climate change stumbles around like a Friday night drunk, trying to explain he wasn’t being racist to the barman – a denier position emerges, unsurprisingly.

In places, the mask really slips: “We must keep divisive woke ideologies such as Critical Race Theory (CRT) and gender ideology out of the classroom.” – to be honest, I don’t even know what those two are.

The standard enemies are put up – the civil service, the BBC.  Amid all the thrust and parry, there’s nothing  about making a better, more inclusive and cohesive world to live in; arts, sports and culture don’t feature in this barstool view of the world: a dullard’s grim vision.

Don’t be a member of the wrong sort of minority would be my advice, should any of this come to pass. 
 

https://www.reformparty.uk/reformisessential

Topic

[chrisonabike]

David9694 wrote:

The Except buses qualifier can be seen at the opposite end but this is the picture you might better have used! 

Good to see the bike getting through!  (Also noting possible “suppressed demand” in the form of other bikes locked up.)

If there really are a high density of pedestrians it may make sense to say “no bikes” in places and times.  But I think having buses passing through the pedestrianised zone but “no bikes” suggests either they’re not managing a “yoof” problem or that attitudes of folks in Lincolnshire are still stuck in the days before the “mechanical horse”!

[David9694]

The Except buses qualifier

The Except buses qualifier can be seen at the opposite end but this is the picture you might better have used! 

[chrisonabike]

David9694 wrote:

David9694 wrote:

Lincolnshire Reform leader dismisses idea of climate emergency

Ah – I remembered it!  Here’s David Hembrow (UK/NL cycle blogger) looking at Lincolnshire (he lived in Cambridge for some time and cycled in Lincolnshire).  In particular comparing Boston and a similar Dutch town.  He pointed out both have paved pedestrianised areas – but in the UK version quite a few vehicles (including regular buses) are permitted – but cycling is banned!

11 years later and it looks like nothing has changed…

I think it’s less like Reform have got in, more some of the old Conservatives have rebranded…

[chrisonabike]

TBF “black and minority

TBF “black and minority ethnic” groups are already seriously under-represented in councils (as well as being slightly underrepresented as MPs).

Of course … Reform could have embraced that and picked up on all the (presumably) latent support (everyone’s a winner, right?)  And no doubt they’d point to the ones they do have.

[hawkinspeter]

David9694 wrote:

More Reform downplaying of past offensive tweets

 https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/new-west-northamptonshire-reform-uk-31657418

What became of the candidate vetting process?  Remember all that? 

I doubt that Reform does any vetting of candidates apart from checking that their skin colour is white enough.

[David9694]

More Reform downplaying of

More Reform downplaying of past offensive tweets

 https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/new-west-northamptonshire-reform-uk-31657418

What became of the candidate vetting process?  Remember all that? 

[chrisonabike]

David9694 wrote:

David9694 wrote:

[ Lincolnshire Reform leader wrote ] “But the influence of man on the climate is so minimal, and the rush to net zero is costing us so much money — it will make absolutely no difference.”

He’s doing the history of and realities in his own neck of the woods a disservice!  At least – geoengineering is clearly a thing in Lincolnshire.  There’s the small matter of the coast – especially the Wash and (going a little south) the Fens, parts of which used to be swamp or otherwise sub-aqua *.  Farming has changed the place quite a bit.  And perhaps he should have a word with the fishermen also? (Ah … but the lack of kinds of fish is probably down to them foreign beggars making free with “UK fish stocks”.)

Net zero – safe to say I have a very different viewpoint from him.  But it gives me little comfort to say he may be somewhat right about the outcome.  Certainly many of us will end up paying lots of money chasing net zero (or rather – “net zero the way we define it which includes not giving up our niceties and cash”).  If only because others will be making their fortunes.

And it may in fact not make that much difference either.  Too long a discursion for here but a kind of “Jevons Paradox” perhaps applies.  There’s the historical fact of ever increasing average resource usage by humans.  And populations are still growing…

Of course, perhaps “something else happens” (probably nasty) – war, political revolutions, technological paradigm shift (reasonably likely).  Given that few of us are prepared to take up growing kale and tatties atop a moor I don’t think we’ve got much of a better move for our children’s children though.  Of course a better one for us (if we’re a certain age) might well be “light up / raise a glass and and say ‘balls to it!  Après moi, le déluge’ “.

That last will definitely get some votes.

*  If it weren’t for the Dutch (again).  I sometimes wonder if there’s some hidden prejudice against all things Dutch (along with the overt “Dutch courage” / “Dutch leave” / “Double Dutch” etc.)  Perhaps a cultural memory of “the Dutch are in the Medway” or from those who objected to William and Mary coming over here, becoming our monarchs? 

[David9694]

Lincolnshire Reform leader

Lincolnshire Reform leader dismisses idea of climate emergency

He has strongly criticised the government’s target of achieving net zero by 2050

“But the influence of man on the climate is so minimal, and the rush to net zero is costing us so much money — it will make absolutely no difference.”

Oh, I see what you’ve done there – you’ve mixed-up man’s influence on the overall composition of the Earth’s atmosphere with the much simpler idea of the increased man-made greenhouse gases that drive global warming and climate breakdown.  Easily done when you’ve taken no time at all to open your mind to the science. 

But my I think my favourite bit in a ‘when someone tells you who they are, believe them the first time’ kind of way is this:

“More broadly, on Twitter and X posts, this is Reform UK — we are human beings, we are normal people, we are not career politicians. We’ve made mistakes in the past, we’ve said stupid things, I’ve apologised for the tweets in the past. That is what you get with Reform UK — true, straightforward, straight-talking people.”

“Judge me on what’s going to come, not some tweet from three or four years ago.”

Before, before. You’re living in the past, Marge, quit livin’ in the past. 

https://www.lincolnshirelive.co.uk/news/lincoln-news/lincolnshire-reform-leader-dismisses-idea-10184551?int_source=nba

Lincolnshire mayor Andrea Jenkyns says it’s time for ‘grown-up politics’ as the real work starts now

The former Conservative MP swept to victory in the Mayoral race

A fractionally better account of herself here, with the Lincolnshire flag in view, interestingly. There seems to be a dispute about whether she was eligible to be on the Electoral Register. 

 https://www.lincolnshirelive.co.uk/news/lincoln-news/lincolnshire-mayor-andrea-jenkyns-says-10175613

Finally, clearly Labour nationally are up against some well positioned, sophisticated opposition and in this local case the usual loud opposition – but if this is going to be the pattern, it doesn’t make supporting them any easier.  Anyway, read more in my self-help guide “So You’ve Caved-in to Drivers” 

Disputed traffic restrictions suspended by council

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cly347x9y9po

[David9694]

brooksby wrote:

David9694 wrote:

Net Zero initiatives like solar farms and battery farms have been a regular target of Reform. Deputy leader Richard Tice promised “Reform’s new councils like Lincolnshire will wage war against net stupid zero things. Developers and investors take note – it will cost you money.”

Lincolnshire is one of those counties which are pretty close to sea level, isn’t it…? Hmm.

See also: large chunks of Cambridgeshire. 

https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/local-news/map-shows-areas-cambs-could-27887396

[brooksby]

David9694 wrote:

Net Zero initiatives like solar farms and battery farms have been a regular target of Reform. Deputy leader Richard Tice promised “Reform’s new councils like Lincolnshire will wage war against net stupid zero things. Developers and investors take note – it will cost you money.”

Lincolnshire is one of those counties which are pretty close to sea level, isn’t it…? Hmm.

[David9694]

The promises Reform UK might

The promises Reform UK might struggle to keep after landslide Lincolnshire victories

The party has focused on national issues, but could struggle to change them on a local level

Net Zero initiatives like solar farms and battery farms have been a regular target of Reform. Deputy leader Richard Tice promised “Reform’s new councils like Lincolnshire will wage war against net stupid zero things. Developers and investors take note – it will cost you money.”

Mr Tice has suggested that the council could use judicial reviews, lawsuits and health and safety notices to stop any solar developments. Professor Defty said it was unclear how effective judicial reviews would be, as the previous Conservative government had “rolled back” their powers.

https://www.lincolnshirelive.co.uk/news/local-news/promises-reform-uk-might-struggle-10170756?

Tice seems unnaturally animated about renewables.  

Over-promising and under-delivering has long been a source of disillusionment (“they’re all the same”) among voters and this might be one of the reasons for Reform.  Time will tell, I guess. 
 

[David9694]

New mayor of Cambridgeshire

New mayor of Cambridgeshire and Peterborough vows to ‘end war on motorists’

Paul Bristow made four major changes on his first day in office

“Today I am ending the war on motorists, ensuring that your money is spent effectively and putting my manifesto priorities in place. We are getting Cambridgeshire and Peterborough moving.”

Mr Bristow also wrote to the East-West Rail Company to outline how a Cambridge light rail system could connect Cambourne to the city well before East-West Rail arrives. (I’m glad we’ve got people like Paul on board – those blinkered East West Rail dunderheads would never have thought of that.)

https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/new-mayor-cambridgeshire-peterborough-vows-31588021?int_source=nba

[chrisonabike]

David9694 wrote:

David9694 wrote:

It’s all the Council’s fault of course. And lo, it came to pass that Reform didst come and sort it all out – they intervened and were tough on lazy contractors. Except they weren’t because their approach is less state intervention and control (is this right? Ed) and fewer council workers to do all this, not more.

Indeed – but as we see (even thoughtful) people also say – “we all accept things aren’t working well currently.  And ‘works’ and ‘roads’ are largely the remit of the council.  If the council doesn’t seem to be doing anything, and the status quo we’ve had for years has resulted in no change… why not try something different?”

I certainly agree that we should look at how our feedback loops are serving us – no checks and balances, not much reason to make things better.

Of course … the devil is in the “remit of the council” bit and the “something different” you want to try.

Local governent can certainly be inefficient.  AFAIK they all work with private industry though.  And private industry is also by nature inefficient (profit must be made, and usually an abundance of that to pay the people who are in fact usually only interested in the money side of it, the shareholders…)

Perhaps the question should be to what extent and how should councils deal with issues which largely derive from tens / hundreds of thousands of people each asserting e.g. their “right to drive” daily, their desire to have hot and cold running AI around the clock, and indeed to get their own slice of the pie?

The “what different to try” one … there does seem to be a persistant notion here that we are falling between two stalls – and if only we can go all in on me and my “disruptor” pals with bright ideas and/or “free up the markets” that will change everything for the better.  I feel that overlooks that at times both those kinds of influences are not new, and have in fact lead us to where we are…

[David9694]

I’m old enough to remember

I’m old enough to remember the Cones Hotline – a number posted on motorway yellow signs for drivers (with good recall) to report all the cones.

My older brother says there was a song “help! The cones are taking over” (to the tune of Glory, Glory Hallelujah”?)  I never did hear of it making one jot of difference to anything e.g. when Colin from Portsmouth reported 5  (or was it 10?) miles of cones on the M27.

Roadworks, most notably for gas, do seem to be upsetting drivers a lot on my patch – “why can’t we see anybody working??” Some even claim, from the comfort of their homes, that put in charge they’d sort it all out in half the time (etc). Do it at night, do it in the day, do it in the summer, do / don’t do it in the holidays, do it in the winter, etc. 

It’s all the Council’s fault of course. And lo, it came to pass that Reform didst come and sort it all out – they intervened and were tough on lazy contractors. Except they weren’t because their approach is less state intervention and control (is this right? Ed) and fewer council workers to do all this, not more. 

 

 

[chrisonabike]

Hirsute wrote:

The thing is, no council (ok there might be one) has an inhouse highways operational team whose job it is to fix roads and maintain them. It’s all out sourced to private companies (thanks to Thatcher).

What is required is signing off the works and getting the companies to do the job properly where the reinstatement or work is not up to standard.

And it is exactly the last part which is missing I suspect.  I bet having gained “efficiencies” by outsourcing the actual fixing up (or simply having it put into contracts that utilities and developers “will make good”) we then succumbed to the temptation to get rid of all the council staff who would have actually checked that the work was done and adequate (properly, not just on screen).  Or the resources to actually chase defaulting companies (“it’s nothing to do with us, it’s our sub-contractor’s subcontractor’s subcontractor…”).  And if they become sluggish to respond how can we get things fixed up to a decent standard in a reasonable time for the public?

[Author]

Replies